New Delhi, June 16 (IANS) If ever the political conundrums in India be chronicled separately, the ongoing process of the Trinamool Congress disintegration may likely top the list where separate factions are moving in different directions; each claiming itself to be “original” even as the jury is out.
While many legal opinions are to the contrary, the two prominent rebel groups — one of breakaway MLAs, the other of dissident MPs — each claim itself to be the “real Trinamool”.
Meanwhile, Trinamool Congress founder Mamata Banerjee continues to watch warily as Chairperson of the political organisation she founded with other rebel Congress leaders in 1998.
Less than three decades later, times are now witnessing a repeat of intra-organisational rebellion in Bengal.
Incidentally, the unrest follows rising discontent over leadership disputes, particularly against the growing influence of Mamata Banerjee’s nephew Abhishek Banerjee.
The Trinamool Congress is facing its gravest internal crisis yet, with 20 of its 28 Lok Sabha MPs defecting to the little-known Nationalist Citizens Party of India (NCPI) and close to 60 of its 80 MLAs in West Bengal Assembly separating.
Legal experts are sharply divided whether the MPs move shields the rebels from disqualification under India’s anti-defection law.
The rebels claim protection under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule, which exempts legislators from disqualification if two-thirds of a party’s lawmakers agree to a merger.
Legal opinions differ, with some contending the use of “party” in the paragraph implying the organisation and not its lawmaker — even if they comprise more than two-third strength of its total membership. They contend that the law requires the original political party to merge, not just its legislators.
Rebels also also cite a 2022 verdict of the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court in the Goa defection case where the bench upheld the Speaker’s decision not to disqualify Congress MLAs who defected to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The court reasoned that since more than two-thirds of the Congress Legislature Party had crossed over, the move qualified as a “merger” under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule.
The Supreme Court, while disposing of earlier petitions as infructuous, allowed fresh challenges but has yet to deliver a definitive judgment.
The current controversy is close to the one in Maharashtra where the Shiv Sena and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) split a few years ago.
Critics note that the Supreme Court’s later observations in the 2023 Shiv Sena split case made it clear that a Legislature Party cannot act independently of the political party.
At that time, the contentious issue was simultaneously taken up by the Maharashtra Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar over the disqualification process, the Election Commission over allotting party name and election symbol, and the Supreme Court, where some matters are pending.
The case is at a decisive stage where the apex court’s forthcoming judgment will not only determine the fate of the rebel Goa legislators but also reshape the interpretation of India’s anti-defection law. Thus, the Trinamool rebellion is being watched closely; it could become the next test case to clarify whether the “two-thirds merger” clause can be used as a loophole for mass defections or a legitimate safeguard for collective political realignment.
In West Bengal Assembly, meanwhile, a significant majority of Trinamool MLAs backed expelled leader Ritabrata Banerjee as Leader of the Opposition, deepening the schism between the organisational and legislative wings of the party.
Ritabrata Banerjee reiterated that this faction is the “real Trinamool” and will not “merge” with any other party. While a prominent rebel Trinamool MP face, Sudip Bandyopadhyay, has announced that though they were now merging with the NCPI, they will represent the “real Trinamool” in Parliament, beginning with the upcoming Monsoon session.
Amidst the issue lies the larger debate of an apparent grey zone in the anti-defection law, leading to pertinent questions: Does the merger exception apply when legislators join a party with no prior representation, and if expelled members still claim legitimacy through numerical strength.
Eminent jurists suggest that the Supreme Court may need to deliver a definitive judgment to resolve these ambiguities.
And all this while, Mamata Banerjee sits facing the challenge of salvaging her organisational integrity and navigating a legal minefield that could redefine the contours of India’s anti-defection jurisprudence.
–IANS
jb/khz
